NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche once said, “I’m not upset that you lied to me, I’m upset that from now on I don’t trust you.” These words come to mind as leading scientific and media figures lose their restraint or neutrality as they mourn the outcome of the presidential election. After they were able to recover, the public was told not to ignore what they were seeing.
It’s no wonder that Trump’s sweeping victory last week sparked hysteria among some of Harris’ supporters, from women who promised to break up with their men to others cutting their hair for people who promised to flee the country (including those who wondered if he ” leaving the United Statesā for Hawaii).
It is also no surprise that New York Governor Kathy Hochul will label more than half of the voters as “anti-American” for voting for Trump or other Democratic politicians, declaring that we are now officially moving to a dictatorship because of this. democratic elections.
AMERICAN SCIENCE EDITOR BLAST ‘F—ING FASCISTS’ WHO VOTED DONALD TRUMP
It is the media elite that is the most interesting to watch. Obviously, the response on MSNBC and CNN is expected to be figures like contributor Claire McCaskill crying on air.
However, other news organizations like CBS News have long maintained claims of neutrality even as the network has been criticized for revealing the Harris-Walz ticket. This included accusations of bias in its handling of the vice presidential debate because CBS insisted that its hosts and reporters were completely neutral in the election.
However, after the election, CBS News anchor John Dickerson choked on national television in an interview on “The Late Show with Stephen Colbert”..” Dickerson chose to go on a show that has been openly anti-Trump for years. However, to the surprise of many, even days after the election, Dickerson was still overcome with grief.
Colbert asked: “How do you explain this to a 14-year-old today? How do you explain this election?”
“I will try not to think about my son because …,” Dickerson began to respond before losing his composure.
It is one thing that the hosts of the last night like Jimmy Kimmel tear up over the results, but this is one of the top news figures in one of the three top networks.
So far, there has been no reaction at CBS. It is in stark contrast to the recent controversy involving CBS News host Tony Dokoupil who was immediately criticized by CBS for criticizing the author for his anti-Israel views as showing bias. Dokoupil was reportedly pushed to an “emotional meeting” with network staff upset with perceived bias in favor of Israel.
So, how neutral is CBS when its anchor chokes at the thought of Trump’s victory? The answer is simple: The public is told to ignore and trust journalists who cannot discuss the election results without fighting back tears.
The message was even more dire in Scientific American. Once a popular scientific publication, the magazine was increasingly criticized for its political and pseudoscientific views. Much of the blame has focused on Laura Helmuth, editor-in-chief.
After the election, Helmuth was in turmoil on social media.
He called Gen X voters king racists.” He denied “solidarity to all the people whose meanest, dumbest, most bigoted high school classmates celebrated early results because they went to the moon and back.” He even added a curse to his Indiana friends. as “racist and sexist” for voting for Trump.
Helmuth called members of his generation “f—ing fascists.” (Image of Bluesky)
The post makes no claim to neutrality, and many have raised concerns about the magazine’s direction. Helmuth responded by deleting the comment and simply telling readers to forget what he said.
In fairness, Helmuth tried to separate his personal views from those of the editor-in-chief. However, his “expression of shock and bewilderment at the election results” is similar to what many in magazine politics have rejected in recent years.
In 2020, Scientific American broke with 175 years of non-partisan tradition to endorse Joe Biden in the presidential election. Conservatives have complained about the tenor and thrust of the magazine, which used to be apolitical.
The bottom line is that Helmuth’s anger isn’t limited to her social media accounts.
The public is again told to ignore the man behind the curtain. However, many people have already left.
The Washington Post will not endorse a candidate in the 2024 presidential election. (Oliver Contreras/For The Washington Post via Getty Images)
As I discuss in my new book, “The Indispensable Right,” many in media and journalism schools have decisively abandoned objectivity and neutrality years ago. The result is a decline in revenue and readership as the public turns to new media and other sources for the news.
At the Washington Post, publisher and CEO William Lewis put it bluntly by telling staff, “Don’t sugarcoat it… We’re losing a lot of money. Your audience has halved in recent years. People aren’t reading your stuff. It’s true ? I can’t get drunk on sugar anymore.”
CLICK HERE for more FOX NEWS opinions
However, almost immediately after Trump won, the Post ran an editorial titled “The second fight for Trump must start now.”
The problem is, when “people don’t read your stuff,” fewer are likely to join the second resistance after rejecting the first resistance. Many may doubt that the CBS anchor who couldn’t discuss Trump’s victory without losing his cool will look objectively at the Trump Administration in the years to come.
Even fewer believe assurances from figures like Helmuth that he will achieve “editorial objectivity” after accusing anyone who supports Trump of being a silent racist.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
Of course, if you believe that more than half the country is “stupid”, you might believe that they will forget about the post-election crisis.
Maybe they are right. It used to be said that “chumps prefer a beautiful lie to an ugly truth.” The problem is, if this election proves one thing, it’s that many voters clearly feel like they’re being played as chumps by the media and the political establishment.
Pulling back the curtain doesn’t work for Great Oz, and it will work even less for legacy media.
CLICK HERE to read more from JONATHAN TURLEY
